# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _
No. 1 5- 14 56

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e

v.

Ada m Cad e Mi ch ael Gil so n

ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Nor th ern Dis tri ct of I owa , W at erl oo

__ __ __ __ __ __
Su bm it te d: Marc h 1 4, 2 01 6 Fil ed : J un e 1 3, 2 01 6 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re MUR PHY, BEAM, an d GRUENDER, Ci rcu it Ju dg es

.

__ __ __ __ __ __

PER CURI AM.

Ada m Cad e Mi ch ael Gil so n ap pe al s fr om th e di st ric t co ur t's im

po si ti on of a 1
90 -m on th sen te nc e fo ll owi ng Gil so n's co nd it io na l gu il ty ple a to on e co un t o f be in g

The Hon or ab le Lin da R. Rea de
, Ch ie f Ju dg e, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Co ur t fo r 1 th e Nor th ern Dis tri ct of I owa

.a f

el on in po ss es si on of fir earm s an d am m un it io n in vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. §§
92 2( g ) ( 1 ) a n d 92 4( a)(2 ). He ch al le ng es th e di st ric t co ur t's de ni al of a m ot io n to

su pp res s an d th e fo ur -le ve l en ha nc em en t pu rs ua nt to Uni t e d S t a t es Sen te nc in g Gui de li ne s (U.S.S.G.) § 2K2 .1(b )(6 )(B) be cau se he "u se d or po ss es se d [th e] fir earm . . . in co nn ect io n wi th an ot he r fel on y off en se ." W e aff

irm.

On May 2, 20 14
, whi le co nd uc ti ng su rv ei ll an ce at a ho us e su sp ect ed to be us ed
f o r meth am

ph et am in e di st rib ut io n, an of fic er wit h th e W at erl oo , Io wa, Po li c e Dep art m en t i de nt ifi ed a ve hi cl e p ark ed th ere, l at er fo ll owe d t ha t v eh ic le (dr iv en by Gil so n) an d "o bs erv ed th at th e li cen se pl at e sa t lo wer an d pa rti al ly bl oc ke d so m e of th e le tt ers fo r th e co un ty an d th en al so al m os t th ree- qu art ers of th e act ua l reg is tra ti on

s t ic ke r." The of

fic er co ul d no t read th e reg is tra ti on st ic ke r, ev en at cl os e ran ge

. Bas ed in pa rt on th e ob st ru ct ed vi ew of th e l i c e n s e pl at e, a de pu ty of th e Tam a Co un ty Sh eri ff su bs eq ue nt ly co nd uc te d a tra ffi c st op of th e ve hi cl e. Dur in g th e st op , th e de pu ty ob se rv ed a ha nd gu n un de r th e fro nt pa ss en ge r se at

. A se co n d h an dg un

was la te r lo cat ed un de r th e dr iv er's se at

. The of fic ers al so fo un d am m

un it io n. Bas ed

on th is ev id en ce, a gr an d jury ret ur ne d an in di ct m en t ch arg in g Gil so n wit h be in g a fel on in po ss es si on of fir earm s an d am m un it io n in vi ol at io n of 18 U.S.C. § 92 2( g) (1 ). Gil so n fil ed a m ot io n to su pp res s, ch al le ng in g th e pr ob ab le cau se un de rlyin g th e st op

. The di st ric t co ur t de ni ed th e m ot io n an d th en Gil so n en te red a co nd it io na l gu il ty pl ea

res erv in g hi s ap pe al on th e is su e. The di st ric t cou rt sen te nc ed Gil so n to 90 m on th s' im pr is on m en t.

On ap pe al
, Gil so n ch al le ng es th e de ni al of hi s m ot io n to su p p r e s s an d th e

en ha nc em en t un de r U.S.S.G. § 2K2 .1(b )(6 )(B) at se nt en ci ng

. As to th e st op , Gil so n
arg ue s th e of

fic ers di d no t ha ve pr ob ab le cau se to st op hi s ve hi cl e fo r vi ol at in g Io wa Co de § 3 21 .38
, whi ch ge ne ral ly gov ern s v eh ic le reg is tra ti on pl at es . Spe ci fic al ly at is su e is th e po rti on of th e st at ut e th at req ui res th e reg is tra t io n pl at e be "s ecu rel y fas te ne d" "i n a pl ace an d po si ti on to be cl earl y vi si bl e an d sh a l l b e m ai nt ai ne d free fro m fo rei gn m at eri al s an d in a co nd it io n to be cl ear l y l e g ib le ." Id

. § 32 1.3 8. He

-2

-cl ai m s th at by it s pl ai n la ng ua ge , th e st at ut e do e s no t ap pl y to va li da ti on st ic ke rs

affi xe d to a reg is tra ti on pl at e an d th at th e di st ric t cou rt im pe rm is si bl y ex pa nd ed th e

m ean in g of § 32 1.3 8 in co nc lu di ng ot he rwis e. Upo n de no vo rev ie w, we co nc lu de 2
th at de ni al of th e m ot io n to su pp res s was pr op er be cau se , as th or ou gh ly an al y zed by th e di st ric t co ur t, "Io wa la w req ui res op erat or s o f mo t o r v e hi cl es to di sp la y th e [v al id at io n] st ic ke r su ch th at it rem ai ns read ab le ," an d th e r e f o re pr ob ab le cau se

su pp or te d t he st op . Accor di ng ly, we affi rm . See 8 th Cir . R. 47 B.

Gil so n al so req ue st s th at th is co ur t ov erru le Uni te d St at es v. Ja ck so n, 63 3 F.3 d
70 3 (8 th Ci r. 20 11 ), an d fu rth er ov erru le or di st in gu is h Uni te d St at es v. W al ke r, 77 1
F.3 d 44 9 (8 th Ci r. 20 14 ), cert

. de ni ed
, 13 5 S. Ct

. 15 38 (2 01 5)
, an d i ts pr og en y in whi ch th is co ur t ho ld s th at whe n a de fen da nt is co nv ic te d of be in g a fel on in

po ss es si on of a fir earm in a m an ne r th at al s o vi ol at es Io wa Co de § 72 4.4 (1 ), he

po ss es se s t he fir earm

in co nn ect io n with an ot he r fel on y off en se for pu rp os es of t he fo ur -le ve l en ha nc em en t in U.S.S.G. § 2K2 .1(b )(6 )(B)

. W al ke r, 77 1 F.3 d at 45 2- 53 ;

se e a l s o U n i t e d St at es v. Bo ot s, 81 6 F.3 d 97 1, 97 4- 75 (8 th Ci r. 20 16 ) (ap pl y in g W al ke r an d ho ld in g th at Io wa Co de § 72 4.4 (1 ) qu al ifi ed as an ot he r fel on y of fen se fo r
pu rp os es of th e U.S.S.G. § 2K2 .1(b )(6 )(B) en ha nc em en t). Gil so n reco gn iz es th at th is

pa ne l is un ab le to rev ers e ex is ti ng pr eced en t, Owsl ey v. Lue bb ers , 28 1 F.3 d 68 7, 69 0 (8 th Ci r. 20 02 ) (p er cu ria m ) ("I t is a card in al ru le in [th is ] ci rcu it t ha t on e pa ne l is bo un d by th e de ci si on of a pr io r p a n e l

. " )
, bu t arg ue s th es e cas es were im pr op erl y de ci de d an d sh ou ld be rev ie wed by th e co ur t en ba nc

. W e ack no wled ge th e arg um en t al th ou gh we are b ou nd by W al ke r.

Fo r th e rea so ns st at ed he rei n, we af fir m

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

The di st ric t co ur t's le ga l co nc lu si on s are rev ie wed de no v o a n d i ts fact ua l 2 fin di ng s are rev ie wed fo r cl ear erro r. Uni te d St at es v. Van ov er, 63 0 F.3 d 11 08
, 11 13

- 14 (8t h C ir. 2 01 1)

. -3

-